Samsung is Suing Its Brand Ambassador For Using an iPhone in Public (appleinsider.com)

Samsung is suing its Russian brand ambassador for using an iPhone X, demanding as much as $1.6m in compensation, media reports submitted by readers said Wednesday. From a report: Russian brand ambassador for Samsung, Ksenia Sobchak, is reportedly being sued by the South Korean smartphone producer, for allegedly being caught in public using an iPhone X instead of handsets she was supposed to be promoting. Ksenia Sobchak was hired by Samsung to market its smartphones in the country, with the Russian TV presenter, journalist, and politician contracted to use the smartphones in public. Under the terms of similar agreements between companies and influential people, they are not typically allowed to be seen using competing products in public, a rule that Sobchak broke.

According to The Mirror, Sobchak was spotted using an iPhone X during a television interview, with the personality attempting to hide the Apple smartphone under a piece of paper while the cameras were on. Sobchak is also said to have used the iPhone X during social events in Moscow and other TV appearances, again against the contract's rules.

Comments

Before anyone gets all outraged

[Anonymous Coward]

Note that PLENTY of manufactures do this.... If you're the brand ambassador, you're expected to promote your brand..

Re:Before anyone gets all outraged

[hawguy]

Sure... but ordinarily I'd expect that the consequence would be dismissal, if they found out, not actually getting *sued* over it.

Unless she had received any salary or payments in advance, in which case I could see it.

Otherwise, however... Samsung shouldn't really be able to do more than fire her ass for not promoting the company as expected.

Why would you assume that? They hired and promoted her as a brand ambassador -- their damages exceed just the loss of publicity from her not using the phone in public, but also the negative press from people seeing that even someone that Samsung paid to use their phone chooses to use an iPhone.

seems reasonable

[gravewax]

Gets paid a shitload with very specific contract conditions. Breaks said conditions, she gets sued. completely standard and reasonable, why is it a story here?

Re:seems reasonable

[hawguy]

It doesn't matter if it was in the contract or not. It's just outrageous to reprimand someone for the type of phone they use.

She wasn't fired just for her choice of phone, she was fired for violating the contract she signed (and was paid for). There's a word for signing a contract to do something and then not doing it, it's called fraud. If you paid someone $1000 to repaint your house, and he took your money and used it to paint someone else's house, would you be arguing "It's outrageous to reprimand someone for not painting a house, people shouldn't be forced to work"?

Re:seems reasonable

[Mascot]

It would be outrageous if Samsung fired factory workers for using a different phone. A _brand ambassador_, on the other hand, is literally paid specifically to promote the brand. If you don't want to use a product, don't become a freakin' brand ambassador for it and don't sign a contract saying you will use said brand.

Re:seems reasonable

[Dan East]

If you paid someone $1000 to repaint your house, and he took your money and used it to paint someone else's house

It's far worse than that. This is a matter of image. She was paid specifically for that purpose, because of her high profile status and the image it would portray. Not only did she not help Samsung's image, she directly harmed it, far more than the value of the amount she was paid. A better analogy is that you paid someone $1000 to repaint your house and they vandalized it instead.

Well, that's an own goal

[squiggleslash]

I suspect relatively few people would have heard of this if Samsung hadn't proposed suing. Even if we did, we wouldn't have thought about the implications.

But, now you're suing. You're not tearing up a contract, you're suggesting it's a REALLY BIG DEAL by suing for millions of dollars. And so we're forced to look at the story closer, and realize that, yeah, it kinda is a really big deal. I mean, most of us wouldn't care that deeply about what we use. I'm an Android user, but if I were paid to use an iPhone for a year, I'd use it, it'd be my primary phone.

It's hard to imagine a situation where I'd risk not receiving the money because of some minor quibble about the UI, or lack of user programmability, or whatever.

Which means... Samsung's phones really must suck. I mean, like really suck. I mean, why would someone actually ditch a phone they're paid to use for a friggin' iPhone? People, the iPhone's UI isn't that compelling, it's nice, but... OMG the Samsung UI must be just awful. Awful.

So now we realize why Samsung considers it a really big deal. By using an iPhone, this Russian celebrity has just told the world that the Samsung phone he was paid to use is the worst phone in the entire universe, that it's practically unusable, and you should probably avoid it.

I had a Galaxy Nexus once. I hated it. So I can sympathize.

But just think, if Samsung had just decided to quietly terminate the contract, nobody, not me, not you, would have ever gone through this thought process.

Nonsense...

[YuppieScum]

They voluntarily signed a contract - and received significant payment - to only use Brand X. They were caught using Brand Y.

That's a very simple case of "breach of contract."

You, sir, are an idiot.